21 December 2021
By Giang Thi Huong Tran and Waewpen Piemwichai
Because this is a proposed decree not directly subordinate to any existing law, designed to be quickly issued to tackle the current situation in personal data protection, the Draft PDPD, after being approved by the government, would be subject to additional approval by the Standing Committee of the National Assembly before it could be promulgated and take effect.
(i) Consent must be obtained from the data subjects;
One exemption is that if conditions (ii) and (iii) above cannot be fulfilled, these two conditions could be replaced by two other conditions, namely: (ii)’: there is a commitment from the data processor to protect the data, and (iii)’: there is a commitment from the data processor to apply measures to protect the data.
If a single condition is not met, for example, if there is no approval from the PDPC, then Vietnamese citizens’ personal data could not be transferred out of Vietnam
Because the Draft PDPD has not yet been promulgated and thus has not taken effect, the data localization requirement is not yet enforced in Vietnam, but businesses should be alert and prepare in advance as much as possible. Please also see the discussion in section 2 below.
The Draft Decree on Cybersecurity (which has been available for public consultation) has narrowed down this broad language. Based on the draft decree, storing data and/or having branches or representative offices in Vietnam is only required when all three following conditions are met:
(i) Such enterprise provides telecom and/or online services under the list provided under the Draft Decree on Cybersecurity;
Another big concern is that the Draft PDPD needs to be in line with Vietnam’s international commitments in international agreements such as the WTO, CPTPP, and RCEP which facilitate the flow of data. However, these international agreements have a legal justification ground of “legitimate public policy objective” which allows member states to adopt or maintain measures inconsistent with the cross-border transfer of information rule, as long as the measures would not constitute a means of arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on trade; and would not impose restrictions on transfer of information greater than required to achieve the objective.
Despite this justification ground, the need for data flow is inevitable in the digital economy and digital society toward which Vietnam has directed its development; thus, the approval or registration process could still be arguably considered as imposing restrictions greater than required to achieve the objective because it imposes much greater cost, time, and human resources requirements for industries and authorities, and delays transactions and business operations and the flow of data. Instead, the government could use its manpower in a more efficient way such as enforcement of the law, building capacity for enterprises, etc. It is recommended that the post-check mechanism should be used instead of pre-check of registration/approval.
The Draft PDPD should also be harmonized with other international laws, for example, the EU’s GDPR, as much as possible in order to facilitate businesses’ cross-border transactions. One example for consideration is the need to differentiate between data controller and data processor to regulate their respective obligations and responsibilities to personal data owners, which is not addressed in the Draft PDPD. According to GDPR, the data controller determines the purposes for which and the means by which personal data is processed, thus, the data controller is the main party responsible for data breaches and to consumers, while the data processor processes personal data only on behalf of the data controller. The data processor is usually a third party external to the company. The duties of the data processor toward the data controller must be specified in a contract or another legal act.
For further information, please contact:
Waewpen Piemwichai, Tilleke & Gibbins
waewpen.p@tilleke.com